RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


GreedyTop -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 7:19:28 AM)

Peon.. darling.. too bad you're not here...


*sigh*

Just imagine the fun Hibbie and I could have with you for this most commercial of holidays! She and I could make sure that you would forever greet Valentines day with HUGE smile ;)




Kirata -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 7:24:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Hotspur:
But will they come when you do call for them?

Hamlet:
That is the question.

K.




Marc2b -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 7:29:17 AM)

Because he was a very smart man with a rare ability (particularly for his era imho) to see things from other people's perspectives. 

For example, Shakespeare was NOT a proto anti-antisemite despite what some believe because of Shylocks fame'd "if you prick us do we not bleed" speech in The Merchant of Venice.  Shakespeare clearly had a low level antisemitism common, and acceptable, in his culture.  No, he was able to write that speech because he was able to see things from the outsider's perspective... in this case that of a Jew living in a Christian society.

Nor was Shakespeare some sort of proto feminist despite his female characters who display an ability to step out of the traditional roles of women in Elizabethian society (Viola in Twelfth Night, Rosalind in As You Like It).  All of his strong female characters, it has been noted, eventually (even happily) return to their traditional roles by the play's end.  Rather, these characters are another example of seeing things from a different perspective.  Though, I suppose, it could be argued that Shakespeare returned these characters to their traditional roles not because he wanted to but because he felt that his audience (and the powers that be) wouldn't accept it otherwise.

I do agree with the "love me or hate me" quote because both love and hate are forms of obsession (intesities varying amongst individuals and situations, to be sure) and one of the charateristics of obsession is that the object of the obsession is almost always on one's mind.  A victory in love is obvious but if someone hates you and can't stop thinking about you, that is a victory too... you drive your enemy mad just by existing.

Which leads me to one more thing about Shakespeare that I really love: his ability to take what others spend whole paragraphs, even whole books, to explain and condense it down to a single quote:


"All's fair in love and war."
 
"Friendship is constant in all other things save in the office and affairs of love."
 
"The lady doth protest too much."
 
"Parting is such sweet sorrow."
 
"What's in a name?  That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
 

I have come to believe that an appropriate Shakespeare quote can be found for any occasion.



  




mnottertail -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 7:30:11 AM)

PETRUCHIO: Come, come, you wasp; i' faith, you are too angry.

KATHARINA: If I be waspish, best beware my sting.

PETRUCHIO: My remedy is then, to pluck it out.

KATHARINA: Ay, if the fool could find it where it lies,

PETRUCHIO: Who knows not where a wasp does
wear his sting? In his tail.

KATHARINA: In his tongue.

PETRUCHIO: Whose tongue?

KATHARINA: Yours, if you talk of tails: and so farewell.

PETRUCHIO: What, with my tongue in your tail? nay, come again,
Good Kate; I am a gentleman.


(the slow undoing of  a woman is always satisfactory, to me.)




MrRodgers -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 7:31:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GrandPoobah

Shakespeare's success was based largely upon his ability to study and observe humankind. He was, first and foremost, a canny observer of people. He recognized human foibles, and made use of them.

--

In short, his words and his plotting all reflect his ability to observe and comment on human nature, and that's what makes him so compelling. A lot of his plots were stolen from the Greeks, but he made them better by taking out the Deux et Machina of the Gods and putting regular human failing in their place.

GP

I agree yet Freud and others also had great insight to human nature but they were not nearly as eloquent in writing in imagery from their imaginations...to explain and present these human foibles.

Shakespeare had the turn of and the beautiful, variable, malleable use of the English language...down cold.




PeonForHer -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 7:34:03 AM)

quote:

Peon.. darling.. too bad you're not here...


*sigh*

Just imagine the fun Hibbie and I could have with you for this most commercial of holidays! She and I could make sure that you would forever greet Valentines day with HUGE smile ;)
Aww Greedy - thank you!  It's the thought that counts.  And I shall go out and do some thinking on that very subject!




mnottertail -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 7:36:12 AM)

Keep in mind that really, Shakespeare was not original work, in the main, they were scripts that were polished, re-written and reworked for centuries prior.

It was more like Sir Georg Solti's interpretation and arrangement of Beethovens 9th, compared to say; Klem Kadiddlehoppers.




littlewonder -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 8:57:22 AM)

no I don't. That may work for others but not for me.

If I hate someone I'm indifferent to them and they rarely if ever cross my mind. I don't care about them enough to bother.




Anaxagoras -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 9:32:31 AM)

quote:

Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything?

Didn't like reading Shakespear. The jokes are a bit old, and the language a bit too retro for my taste. [8D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b
For example, Shakespeare was NOT a proto anti-antisemite despite what some believe because of Shylocks fame'd "if you prick us do we not bleed" speech in The Merchant of Venice.  Shakespeare clearly had a low level antisemitism common, and acceptable, in his culture.  No, he was able to write that speech because he was able to see things from the outsider's perspective... in this case that of a Jew living in a Christian society.

Me thinkith that ith selectith withith the quoteith. To be hinest, it's a difficult one to call because on the one hand it is fair to say the hatred is in keeping with the era but at the same time its still a strongly negative portrayal other than a line here or there. Its more probable that those quite rare sympathetic sounding lines in the story are down to his excellence as an observant writer in being able to speak for Shylock's character, and the portrayal of Shylock couldn't contrast more with Shakespear's treatment of "The Moor" in Othello.




Marc2b -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 11:35:15 AM)

quote:

Didn't like reading Shakespear. The jokes are a bit old, and the language a bit too retro for my taste. [8D]

 
Nobody really likes reading Shakespeare and unfortunately too many high school students are forced to read him and because they are bored and don't really understand the language, they form negative opinions that aren't really justified.  Shakespeare wasn't meant to be read, it was meant to be watched.  You do have to put a bit of effort into understanding the retro language but once you do, and then "watch" a Shakespeare play (movies don't quite cut it although there are some good ones), it opens up to you.  That it when you will realize that your high school english teacher was an idiot who didn't know what she was doing and that Shakespeare really was a genius.
 
quote:

Me thinkith that ith selectith withith the quoteith. 

 
Try as I might, I am unable to translate this.
 
quote:

To be hinest, it's a difficult one to call because on the one hand it is fair to say the hatred is in keeping with the era but at the same time its still a strongly negative portrayal other than a line here or there. Its more probable that those quite rare sympathetic sounding lines in the story are down to his excellence as an observant writer in being able to speak for Shylock's character, and the portrayal of Shylock couldn't contrast more with Shakespear's treatment of "The Moor" in Othello.

 
My point exactly.  An honest apprasial of Shakespeare's works cannot deny the anti-semetism (or sexism) that appears (almost unconsciously) in his works.  People who love Shakespeare but are uncomfortable with the anti-semitism or sexism will often latch on to a particular passage or two to "prove" that Shakespeare was not anti-semitic or sexist.  I believe they err when they do this.  Shakespeare, I contend, simply possesed the remarkable ability to step outside his own perspective and view the world for the perspective of others.  I suppose we could credit Shakespeare with helping to pave to way to a more tolerant society, but we must still do so with the limitations of the man and his era firmly in mind.
 
Othello didn't fair to well in the end but here too Shakespeare is presents us with a mixed bag.  Many in Venice genuinely admire Othello ("If fortitude is a place, it is best know to him.") but racism still abounds ("Even now an old black ram is topping your white ewe.").
 
Shakespeare's other well known Moor, Aaron in Titus Adronicus, more resembles Shylock (although many scholars consider him a deliberate parody of Barabas in Marlowe's The Jew of Malta).  He is despised by most of those around him.  At one point his affair with Tamora (the queen of the Goths) is exposed when she gives birth to a baby that is obviously his.  A nurse comes to give him this "terrible" news:
 
     "A joyless, dismal, black, and sorrowful issue:
   Here is the babe, as loathsome as a toad
   Amongst the fairest breeders of our clime:
   The empress sends it thee, thy stamp, thy seal,
   And bids thee christen it with thy dagger's point."

To which Aaron responds:

 
    "'Zounds, ye whore! is black so base a hue?"
 
 
A while later, Arron proudly declares:
 
     Now to the Goths, as swift as swallow flies;
   There to dispose this treasure in mine arms,
   And secretly to greet the empress' friends.
   Come on, you thick lipp'd slave, I'll bear you hence;
   For it is you that puts us to our shifts:
   I'll make you feed on berries and on roots,
   And feed on curds and whey, and suck the goat,
   And cabin in a cave, and bring you up
   To be a warrior, and command a camp.

Just as a side note:  Titus Adronicus also contains one of my favorite jokes in Shakespeare.  When the queen's two grown son's confront Aaron about what he has done, one of them declares:

 
"Villan!  Thou hast undone our mother!"
 
To which Aaron replies:
 
"Villian, I have done thy mother."  [:D]






GrandPoobah -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 1:22:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers


quote:

ORIGINAL: GrandPoobah

Shakespeare's success was based largely upon his ability to study and observe humankind. He was, first and foremost, a canny observer of people. He recognized human foibles, and made use of them.

--

In short, his words and his plotting all reflect his ability to observe and comment on human nature, and that's what makes him so compelling. A lot of his plots were stolen from the Greeks, but he made them better by taking out the Deux et Machina of the Gods and putting regular human failing in their place.

GP

I agree yet Freud and others also had great insight to human nature but they were not nearly as eloquent in writing in imagery from their imaginations...to explain and present these human foibles.

Shakespeare had the turn of and the beautiful, variable, malleable use of the English language...down cold.



I think the problem with Freud and his associates was that they might have been able to observe, but then treated what they saw as something "scientific" that needed to be analyzed(no pun intended), whereas Shakespeare, admittedly a much better writer, saw it as raw material for his work. Freud, I think, didn't see people as people...simply as minds to be "understood." He was "all book and no practical."




Anaxagoras -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 2:02:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b
quote:

Didn't like reading Shakespear. The jokes are a bit old, and the language a bit too retro for my taste. [8D]

 
Nobody really likes reading Shakespeare and unfortunately too many high school students are forced to read him and because they are bored and don't really understand the language, they form negative opinions that aren't really justified.  Shakespeare wasn't meant to be read, it was meant to be watched.  You do have to put a bit of effort into understanding the retro language but once you do, and then "watch" a Shakespeare play (movies don't quite cut it although there are some good ones), it opens up to you.  That it when you will realize that your high school english teacher was an idiot who didn't know what she was doing and that Shakespeare really was a genius.

Naw I'm going with the Shakespear was a f$%king... [kidding]

I was really just joking about the language being "retro" but you are quite right that as plays they should be seen in their format. Having said that I quite enjoyed reading Macbeth.

I think a lot of people admire Shakespear because they are told he is good. I'm not going to contend that he isn't a great writer but unless someone reads early-modern English with as much fluency as present day English, they are going to have a very hard time telling how good he truly is. I think it needs to be noted as well that Shakespear owes a lot of debt to the ancient Greek and Roman writers like Seneca.

quote:


 
quote:

To be honest, it's a difficult one to call because on the one hand it is fair to say the hatred is in keeping with the era but at the same time its still a strongly negative portrayal other than a line here or there. Its more probable that those quite rare sympathetic sounding lines in the story are down to his excellence as an observant writer in being able to speak for Shylock's character, and the portrayal of Shylock couldn't contrast more with Shakespear's treatment of "The Moor" in Othello.

 
My point exactly.  An honest apprasial of Shakespeare's works cannot deny the anti-semetism (or sexism) that appears (almost unconsciously) in his works.  People who love Shakespeare but are uncomfortable with the anti-semitism or sexism will often latch on to a particular passage or two to "prove" that Shakespeare was not anti-semitic or sexist.  I believe they err when they do this.  Shakespeare, I contend, simply possesed the remarkable ability to step outside his own perspective and view the world for the perspective of others.  I suppose we could credit Shakespeare with helping to pave to way to a more tolerant society, but we must still do so with the limitations of the man and his era firmly in mind.
 
Othello didn't fair to well in the end but here too Shakespeare is presents us with a mixed bag.  Many in Venice genuinely admire Othello ("If fortitude is a place, it is best know to him.") but racism still abounds ("Even now an old black ram is topping your white ewe.").

I think Shakespear is firmly on the side of Othello. I think the words you quote are stated by Iago, the villain of the piece. Othello is presented as a leader and a noble individual, albeit a flawed one. In contrast to his ability as a warrior, the flaw manifests as a weakness in his own self-image (as I understood it anyway), which manifested as jealousy where he comes to believe that he too is undeserving. He turns into the uncivilised brute he is supposed to be according to the racism of the era but at the end Iago is shown as the villain.

quote:


Just as a side note:  Titus Adronicus also contains one of my favorite jokes in Shakespeare.  When the queen's two grown son's confront Aaron about what he has done, one of them declares:
 
"Villan!  Thou hast undone our mother!"
 
To which Aaron replies:
 
"Villian, I have done thy mother."  [:D]



Kudos for reading one of his lesser appreciated works. One line I quite often use (although its not a joke) is "Get thee to a nunnery"!




kitkat105 -> RE: Why do you think Shakespear was so spot on with everything? (2/14/2012 4:06:30 PM)

I actually really enjoyed Shakespeare, but I always enjoyed English class (my only exposure to it). This thread has inspired me though.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875